460 THE AMERICAN NATURALIST. [VoL. XXXII. 
by a crude and hasty compilation. Mr. Heller has undoubtedly 
prepared and issued his list with sincere conviction that he was 
thereby advancing the cause of the Rochester nomenclature and 
meeting a need of American botanists. But in these days of critical 
work and high bibliographical ideals, when references are carefully 
verified and proofs repeatedly read, the appearance of a work con- 
taining so many glaring errors can scarcely commend any system. 
A slight examination of the list shows such “ first correct combi- 
nations” as Silene cucubalus, Arenaria sajanensis, and Anoda lava- 
teroides on equal footing with Rochester names, some of which are 
their exact synonyms. Names indorsed by the ///ustrated Flora 
appear on the same pages with others, such as Cheiranthus (for 
Erysimum), which are quite opposed to the usage of Messrs. Britton 
and Brown. All the Cerastiums are appended to Arenaria. Mis- 
prints abound. Some good species are omitted. Genera are sub- 
jected to extreme subdivision and many obvious varieties are ranked 
as species. In some cases the same species, such as Montia sarmen- 
tosa and M. saxosa, appear coordinately under different genera. 
Trifolium gracilentum and its variety are repeated under different 
numbers. No care has been taken to give consistent and uniform 
abbreviations of authorities. Thus on a single page of the Cactacez 
the eye meets “ Engelm. & Bigel.,” “E. & B.” “Engel. & Bigel.,” 
“Eng. & Big.,” “Engelm. & Big.,” and “Englm.” Finally, a con- 
siderable number of pure synonyms are rehabilitated. 
After wandering about in this nomenclatorial maze, the bewildered 
reader, in hope of finding some key to it, turns to Mr. Heller’s 
preface, there to learn that during the last few years “a more stable 
system of nomenclature has been introduced.” Is this irony? Surely, 
if the author knew of such a system, he might have divulged it for 
the good of his fellow-botanists, and not have jumbled up “ Kew 
rule ” names, on the one hand, with Brittonian and Greenean names, 
on the other, to say nothing of a liberal admixture of the merest 
synonyms. 
No genus has been more discussed by the reformers than the one 
which they call Tissa. The group has been revised by one of 
their number and largely augmented by another. The generic 
name Tissa, which meets with little favor by the rest of the world, 
has in a way become the shibboleth of the Rochester reformers. 
Let us see how Mr. Heller treats this much-emphasized genus. He 
recognizes sixteen species and varieties. Of these 7. clevelandi and 
T. leucantha have incorrect parenthetical authorities ; Z. clevelandi 
